Love Is God

Love Is God: A Buddhist Interreligious Response to the Vatican Instruction on "Some Aspects of Christian Meditation" Author(s): Victoria Urubshurow
Source: Buddhist-Christian Studies, Vol. 11 (1991), pp. 149-172 Published by: University of Hawai'i Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1390260 . Accessed: 26/08/2013 09:04
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
University of Hawai'i Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to BuddhistChristian Studies.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 158.142.128.179 on Mon, 26 Aug 2013 09:04:18 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
CARDINALRATZINGER'S LE'"I'EK
LoveIs God: A BuddhistInterreligious Response to the Vatican on Instruction "SomeAspectsof Christian Meditation"
VictoriaUrubshurow
Catholic University of America

Since the issue of CardinalJosephRatzinger'sletter on "Some Aspects of Christian Meditation," released by the Congregationof the Faith on December 14, 1989,1 responseshave filtered through the media ringing both praise and criticism for the instruction. A number of reactions have come from persons, including Catholic contemplatives, whose spiritual practicehas been enriched through the dynamics of interreligious dialogue. The Letter has had obvious impact on those involved in such dialogue, yet no response(to my knowledge) systematicallyhas addressedits treatment of Buddhist issues. In light of this, the following essay examines implications of the VaticanLetterfor interreligious dialogue, with special attention to mattersthat bear on Christian-Buddhist dialogue.
I. PUBLIC REACTIONSTO THE LETTER
Catherine Odell notes that a number of Catholic contemplatives and spiritual directors"praisedmany elements" of the Letterand criticizedthe "often sensationalistic press accounts of what the document recommended." The press tended to portraythe Letter as more negative toward Easternreligions than it appearsto those who have consideredits contents with care.2Along these lines, David S. Toolan remarks, "it is plain to see that CardinalJoseph Ratzinger . . .was in a more friendly mood" than would be suggested by "initial press reports . . . [that] made it seem as if Easternspiritualpaths were anathema"3; Ama Samy finds that the Letter "is written with compassionfor the faithful"4; andJames RobertsonPricecontends that "[o]n many points the content of the letter is open and evenhanded."5The perceived strengths of the Letter stem from its general accordwith VaticanII, reflectedin the following stance:
Studies 11 (1991). ? by Universityof HawaiiPress.All rights reserved. Buddhist-Christian
VICTORIAURUBSHUROW Just as "the Catholic Church rejects nothing of what is true and holy in these [non-Christian]religions" [Nostra Aetate, 2], neither should these ways [of meditation] be rejected out of hand simply because they are not Christian. On the contrary, one can take from them what is useful so long as the Christianconception of prayer,its logic and requirementsare never obscured.6 John Wijngaardsinterpretsthe Letterto state "emphaticallythat the search for new forms of meditation is legitimate and that Eastern forms of prayer should not be rejectedout of hand simply becausethey are non-Christian."He agrees that there is danger in a shallow practiceof so-called prayerthat merely lulls the mind through a kind of self-hypnosis, and feels that the Letter "emphasizes correctlythat the searchfor inner 'emptiness of mind' may lead people astray."Wijngaards concurs that the adoption of Eastern methods "should not lead to a denial, or oversight, of what is central" to Christian belief.7 Toolan underscoresthe faults of syncretizingand bowdlerizingEastern techniques, and finds that CardinalRatzingerspeaks with authority precisely because he knows that Christianspiritualitycan "go off on most of these tangents too"; for example: easy-goingharmonizationsof Eastand West, suspensionsof the ethical, an obsession with technique, false "dark nights," the self-help cul-de-sac, a spurioussuperiorgnosis, a cult of the body, gluttonizing on "highs," narcissisticescapismand dissolvingoneself "into the sea of the Absolute."8 From the remarksabove one can conclude that from the perspectiveof interreligious dialogue, the Vatican Letter is fundamentally positive. In theory, according to Toolan, the Letter "legitimizes all those parched Catholic souls who in the last decades have drunk from Easternwellsprings."However,there are less encouragingaspectsof the Letterthat deservecomment. Toolan thinks that the Letter "speaksas if the Roman church had nothing to learn from the East," and feels that it "does not breathe with the firsthand experience, the inquiring spirit and joy of a Thomas Merton[and others]."9Priceobservesthat although the Lettersanctionstaking from non-Christianmeditation " 'what is useful so long as the Christianconception of prayer,its logic and requirements are never obscured,' given Ratzinger'sview of prayer,there is very little that is useful." He feels that "[i]n the end, the letter misses an opportunity for advancing interreligious understanding and cross-culturaldialogue."10Even more subtly, the Letterseems to cast what Fr.Paul Philibert, O.P., characterizes as a "shadow of suspicion" that may be "inspired by the same ill-informed, right-wing activists" who are responsible for a "mean-spirited article in the the influence of Easternforms magazine ThirtyDays which unfairlycaricatured of meditation upon Americanreligious"-an articlethat appearedonly shortly 1 before the VaticanLetter.
BUDDHIST RESPONSE Although the Letter calls for a "thoroughgoing examination" of the "contents and methods" of Easterntechniques,12non-Christianmethods are treated only brieflyand with little care. Yse Masquelierfaults it for a troublesomeignorance 6(fcheuse ignorance) that overgeneralizeswith noxious approximations (des approximationsnuisibles) the "Easternmethods," lumping together those inspired by Hinduism and Buddhism, such as Zen, transcendentalmeditation, or yoga.13Masqueliercharges that the Letter unfairly compares the worst or most vague aspectsof one spiritual world (the Asian) with the best of another (the Christian). As one also sensitive to the richnessand particularityof Asian religions, Fr. Bede Griffiths, O. Cam. O.S.B., remarks, "I find it extremely disappointing [that] [t]here is no hint of the tremendousdepth of [Hindu and Buddhist] spirituality or of its profound wisdom" in the Letter. He observes that "Eastern meditation is treated as though it were a matter of superficial techniques, of 'bits and pieces' " that a Christiancan use, once awareof possible dangersand abuses.14 In this piecemeal approachSamy detects an "inadequate theology of religions,"stating: The Letter seems to envision the use of a few particularEasternpractices, such as breathing and posture: 'bits and pieces should be taken up and expressedanew' (16). Master-disciple relationship is accepted and recommended, but it is not situated in the whole context of the way-it is sim15 ply uprooted and adapted to the model of a 'spiritualFather.' In contrastto the method of applying "bits and pieces" from another tradition out of context, Samycontends that "true inculturationand integration" occurs "only when Christianscan submit themselves to the discipline, in entirety, of an authentic Easternway and walk with the master to the end." This view presumes that (according to Roger Haight) "God's mystery is wider than that revealed inJesus; but God cannot be less than that revealedinJesus."'6 Samy, however,insiststhat [t]he Christianis not asked to become a Hindu or a Buddhist, but only to plunge into the mystery embodied in that non-Christian way. Such a "passing over" is necessaryfor an authentic flowering and renewal. The Letter seems to be suspicious of such a venture and tries to tell the Christian to hold on to his doctrinesand practices.But sadly, no death, no resurrection!(Mk4:26-28).17 Some criticsof the VaticanLetter imply that it does the Church a disservice by offering inadequate support for interreligiousdialogue, which they feel is crucial to the vitality of a religious tradition with respect to both institutional and individual spiritual health. Griffiths recalls that in the fourth century the Church was challenged by the Neo-Platonism of Plotinus and Porphyry,and did not cautiously(as now) "retreatinto the past." Thus, the Churchwas vita-
VICTORIAURUBSHUROW lized through St. Gregoryof Nyssa, who "steeped himself in the philosophy of Plotinus and by subtle changes adapted it to orthodox Christiandoctrine."18 He believes that Christianmeditation should lead one (in the wordsof Fr.John Main, O.S.B.) to "sharein that stream of love which flows betweenJesus and the Father, and is the Holy Spirit," and claims that "many Christianshave found that the Hindu and the Buddhist and Sufi mystics can lead us... toward this depth of unitive prayer."'9 Wijngaardsrecallsthat historicallythe Church'sexposure to Greek, Germanic, Slavic, and Arabic religious thought led to an enrichment of theology and prayer.He notes furtherthat "[t]he genuine development of the ancient Easternspiritualitiesin new Christianexpressions of personal prayerand common worship is of the highest importance to the Church in Asia." Realizing that "the success or failure of Christian inculturationof Easternreligious thought and practicewill affect the Churchin the West too," Wijngaardsremarks: It fills me with concern that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, while rapping the knuckles of a few Western syncretists, should totally overlook the infinitely wider dimensions of the issue. Could it be an example of "straining at a gnat while swallowing a camel" (Mt.
19:24)?20
II. IMPLICATIONSFOR INTERRELIGIOUSDIALOGUE
CardinalJoseph Ratzinger,whose Letteris addressed "in the first place to the bishops," is well-motivated by a wish "that the entire people of God-priests, religious and laity-may again be called to pray, with renewed vigor, to the Father through the Spirit of Christ our Lord." He is sensitive to the spiritual needs of "many Christianstoday [who] have a keen desire to learnhow to experience a deeper and authentic prayer life," and takes special note of those "caught up in the movement towardopenness and exchangesbetween various religions and cultures, [who] are of the opinion that their prayerhas much to gain from [non-Christian]methods."21Emphasizing the importance of love, CardinalRatzingermakes a constructiveeffort to safeguarda genuine Christian experienceof prayerin the midst of openness to what may be true and holy in other faiths. He calls for the study of Easterntechniques, and expressesintelligent caution against indiscriminatefusion of Christianmeditation with nonChristianelements. Most religious practitioners(not least those engaged in interreligious dialogue) probably would support the Vatican Letter'sconviction that authentic spiritual practicegrows from an integrated religious system grounded in love. But the Lettertends toward an extreme caution against outside influence that deservesreconsideration.Maturepractitionersengaged in responsibleinterreligious dialogue need not labor under a heavy threat of spiritually destructive fusion with extratraditionalelements. Their dynamic engagement with other
BUDDHIST RESPONSE faiths should not be confused with what Thomas Merton called a "facile syncretism, a mishmash of semireligiousverbiageand pieties, a devotionalismthat admits everythingand thereforetakes nothing with full seriousness."22 Raimundo Panikkarsees openness to other religions as a manifestation of God's love. What he insightfully calls "intrareligious"dialogue involves real theological work that prompts genuine religious pondering within one's own faith stance. It does not resistdeep encounter. [T]he dialogue of which I speak emerges not as a mere academicdevice or an intellectual amusement, but a spiritual matter of the first rank, a religious act that itself engages faith, hope and love. Dialogue is not bare methodology but an essential part of the religious act par excellence: loving God above all things and one's neighbor as oneself. If we believe that our neighbor lies entangled in falsehood and superstition we can hardly love him as ourselves,without a hypocritical,pitying love that moves us to try plucking the mote out of his eye. Love for our neighbor also makes intellectual demands."23 Despite the theoretical emphasis on Christian love in the Vatican Letter, a disturbing note of triumphalism tends to undermine the "love of neighbor" and openness so important to interreligious dialogue. Cardinal Ratzinger makes a declarationof the wonderful discoverythat all the aspirationswhich the prayerof other religions expressesare fulfilled in the reality of Christianitybeyond all measure, without the personal self or the nature of a creaturebeing dissolved or disappearinginto the sea of the Absolute. 'God is love' (1 Jn. 4:8). This profoundly Christian affirmation can reconcile perfect union with the otherness existing between lover and loved, with eternal exchange and eternal dialogue.24 From the perspective of interreligious dialogue it seems counterproductiveto claim such a "wonderful discoverythat all the aspirationswhich the prayerof other religions expressesare fulfilled in the reality of Christianitybeyond all measure."One should considerhere an importantdistinction between "discovery" and "invention," and ponder the following suggestion: Columbus invented America. Columbus did not discover America, because to discover implies being able to imagine the object of discoveryas a possibility.It was not within the mental framework of Columbus to conceive of a New World. He was Likewise,no Christian, Buddhist, looking for India and he found "Indians."25 Hindu, or anyone else can truly discover that all the aspirations expressed through the prayerof other religions arefulfilled in the realityof his or her own beyond all measure. One cannot make such a discoverybecause one has not traversedthe breadths and penetrated the depths of all those other religions. Without being able to imagine the numerous metaphysical, doctrinal, ritual,
VICTORIAURUBSHUROW and existentialpossibilities of all the other religions, one can never discoverthe absolute superiorityof one's own. One can only invent that superiority.In this light, a few wordsattributedto Buddha Sakyamuniare apt: It is not properfor a wise man who maintains (lit. protects)truth to come to the conclusion: "This alone is Truth, and everythingelse is false".... A man has a faith. If he says, "This is my faith", so far he maintains truth. But by that he cannot proceed to the absolute conclusion: "This alone is To be attachedto one thing (to a Truth, and everythingelse is false".... certainview) and to look down upon other things (views) as inferior-this the wise men call a fetter.26 In sum, it is fair to say that the VaticanLettercrafted by CardinalRatzinger contributesconstructivelyto interreligiousdialogue, through both its sanction of Easternmethods of meditation and its efforts to outline criteriafor their use by Christians.The instruction on aspects of Christianmeditation should be a source of hope and encouragementas it opens the way for serious examination of non-Christianmethods of prayer,and dynamic dialogue. Shadowsof suspicion, blatant overgeneralizations,and notes of triumphalism, in fact, are the hallmark of the beginning stages of interreligious dialogue. They are indications that the "other" has been encountered. They are indications that the "other" is beginning to be conceived as a possibility.As such, they representa prelude to true discovery.
III. A BUDDHIST RESPONSE
To promote the VaticanLetter'scontributionto interreligiousdiscovery,a closer look at its understandingof Buddhism is in order.Direct referenceto the Buddhist tradition is found under the heading "ErroneousWays of Practicing," which opens with a discussionof two early deviations from Church teachings: (1) Pseudognosticism,whose sourceof errorhinged on a denial of the religious value of God's creationtogether with the supplanting of gracewith knowledge (gnosis), and (2) Messalianism,whose claim to charismaticunion with the Holy Spirit was judged by the Churchto be mere psychologicalexperiencegarnered outside of an authentic sacramentalcontext. The Vatican Letter notes that "[b]oth of these forms of errorcontinue to be a temptation for man the sinner," and contends that a contemporarychallenge along similar lines is presented by Easternmethods of meditation-to which the discussionis turned.27 Cardinal Ratzinger observes that "we find ourselves faced with a pointed renewalof an attempt, which is not free from dangersand errors,to fuse ChrisThe Letterthen lists three tian meditation with that which is non-Christian."28 ways that such encounters ("radical to a greater or lesser extent") have been manifest in Christianlives. First, it states that the Churchis faced with the use of "Easternmethods solely as a psychologicalpreparationfor a truly Christian
BUDDHIST RESPONSE contemplation." Second, it points to a more radicalattempt to "generatespiritual experiencessimilar to those described in the writings of certain Catholic mystics [such as the Cloud of Unknowing]." Third (in what seems to be a list graduated in terms of danger, error,and radicality), the Letter speaks of the The portion of the VaticanLetChristianencounter with "Buddhist theory."29 ter (together with notes) that most pointedly invites a Buddhist response is as follows: Still others do not hesitate to place that absolute without images or concepts, which is proper to Buddhist theory*, on the same level as the majesty of God revealedin Christ,which towersabove finite reality. *In Buddhist religious texts, the concept of "nirvana"is understood as a state of quiet consistingin the extinction of everytangible realityinsofar as it is transient, and as such delusive and sorrowful. To this end, they [that is, Christiansyncretists]make use of a "negative theology" which transcendseveryaffirmationseeking to expresswhat God is and denies that the things of this world can offer tracesof the infinity of God. Thus they propose abandoning not only meditation on the salvific works accomplished in history by the God of the old and new covenant, but also the very idea of the one and triune God, who is love, in favor of an immersion "in the indeterminateabyssof the divinity."** **MeisterEckhartspeaks of an immersion "in the indeterminate abyss of the divinity,"which is a "darknessin which the light of the Trinity nevershines.30 Three questions embedded in the passages of the Vatican Letter quoted above reflect an attempt to interpret the meaning of the Buddhist goal of nirvana and its impact on Buddhist practice: (1) Is an absolute without images or conceptsproperto Buddhist theory? as a state of quiet consist(2) Do Buddhist religious texts understand nirva.na in the extinction of insofar as it is transient and, every tangible reality ing as such, delusive and sorrowful? (3) Does Buddhism constitute a "negative theology" which transcendsevery affirmationseeking to expresswhat God is, and thus deny that the things of this world can offer tracesof the infinity of God? Two further questions embedded in those passages bear on Christianapplications or misapplicationsof Buddhist teachings: (4) By what logic might some Christiansplace nirvanaon the same level as the majestyof God revealedin Christ, which towersabove finite reality?
155
VICTORIAURUBSHUROW (5) By what logic might some Christians, on the basis of their contact with Buddhism, propose abandoning not only meditation on the salvificworks accomplishedin history by the God of the old and new covenant, but also the veryidea of the one and triune God, who is love, in favorof an immersion "in the indeterminate abyss of the divinity," which is a darknessin which the light of the Trinitynevershines. The first set of questions suggests a responsein the context of Buddhist theory, and will be treated in detail under the headings: (a) The Question of Buddhist Impersonalism,and (b) The Question of Buddhist Nihilism. The second set of questions, which falls more properlyin the domain of interreligiousdialogue, will be treated summarily under the heading: (c) The Question of Religious Language. The Question of Buddhist Impersonalism A charge of impersonalismis waged against Buddhism in the VaticanLetter, which speaks of "that absolute without images or concepts which is proper to Buddhist theory,"and decriesits associationwith "the majestyof God revealed in Christ, which towers above finite reality."31 As Cardinal Ratzinger places forms of traditional even apophatic Christianprayerunder scrutinyin the Lethis of a Buddhist ter, wariness presumed impersonalismis not surprising.Hownot that the of Buddhist theory develone should foundations ever, very forget of as a meditative experience. A criticalinsight that set oped critique apophatic or mendicant yogis of his day Buddha Sakyamuniapart from the sramanas32 was a conviction that even the most subtle concentrativeabsorptionsculminating in the abodes of nothingness and neither-perception-nor-non-perception were insufficient for liberationor nirvana.33 Traditionteaches that after Buddha experienced the most subtle apophatic states available through abstractiveconcentration, he remained skeptical of their ultimate salvific value. Buddha left his teachersand forged a distinctive meditative path to liberation that involved not only such states of tranquil abiding, but also special insight into the interdependent relationship between person and world. Buddha, thus, promoted a dual means of mental cultivation or bhavana (Sanskrit and Pali): (a) samatha or concentrative meditation, and (b) through which the subtle states of formless absorption are realized;34 of the nature which or vipasyana vipassana(Pali) insight meditation, through lack of inherent existence the world as characterized by impermanence(anitya), of the self (anatman), and suffering (dubkha) is realized.35 Along with the two methods of mental cultivation, Buddha taught a practicalmeans of living in the world accordingto principlesof nonviolence and compassion.This essential threefold structureof morality,concentration, and wisdom is preservedacross the Buddhist spectrum, both in the eightfold path (promoted by Theravadins)
BUDDHIST RESPONSE and in the path of the perfections (promoted by Mahayanists).Together, in complementaryrelationship, they constitute the guidelines for Buddhist religiosity.36 Buddha Sakyamunitaught samatha meditation as a means of mental purification, but warnedagainst confusing the fruits of samathawith nirvana,which is beyond-but not in continuity with-the hierarchyof abstractstates. Nirvana is fundamentally uncaused: yet it is accessed through vipassandmeditation, not through samathameditation. What the absorptionsof samatha meditation, however, cannot produce is thatpermanent transcendenceof the ingrainedpatternsof the human psyche which is the only condition that can properlybe called enlightenment (bodhz)-the achievement of the freedom of nibbana [Pali]. This was the crucial insight in the Buddha's teaching and has often been blurred in later times in spite of the precisionwith which he formulatedit.37 Buddha Sakyamunitaught not only that samathapracticeis insufficient for liberation, but also that the formless absorptionsissuing from abstractivemeditation "may entail their own kind of risk." [P]reciselybecause of the achievement of temporarybut highly rewarding altered states of consciousness the meditator may come to consider the absorptions as ends in themselves, in which case they will hinder rather than help the progressof insight.38 forms of meditation begin with basic concentraBoth samatha and vipassand tion of mind, known as accessconcentration(upacdra samddhi) or momentary concentration (khanika samddhi). Once this basic concentration is achieved, however, vipassanapractice turns to examination of sensory and mental processesinstead of proceeding to ever higher degrees of concentrationas in samatha practice. [In vipassandpractice] the meditator proceeds to examine with steady, careful attention and in the utmost possible detail preciselyall those sensory and mental processeswhich are discardedin abstractivemeditation, including those that normallyoccur at subconsciousor unconsciouslevels. The purpose here is to achieve complete, direct and immediate awareness of all phenomena, which revealstheir basic impermanence (anicca) [Pali] and impersonality(anattd)[Pali], that is to say, the absence of any lasting essence or self-entity in them. It is a matter of achievingfull and clearperception of the radicalimpermanenceof all existing phenomena.39 The practiceof samatha generatesfeelings of bliss, happiness, and ineffable intuition that are distinct from and incompatible with ordinarystates of con-
VICTORIAURUBSHUROW sciousness, namely, waking, sleeping, and dreaming. When experiencing one of the absorptionsone is operating in a distinct mode. By contrast, the practice of vipassanais based in an alert and receptive state of mind that involves the One is "full, continuous, and fully consciousexerciseof all mental faculties."40 not operating outside of the ordinarystates of consciousness,and their normal functions remain fully available, along with an additional sense of mental balance, and so on. Although samatha and vipassanaare both attention-training methods, the formeris like bringing a beam of light down to its sharpestpossible focus on a single point, while the latter is like beaming a finely focused, but broaderlight field onto whatever is happening at a given moment. Samatha produces an altered state of consciousness,while vipassandproduces a higher state of consciousness-"a true transmutationwhich produces new, indelible traitsof consciousness. . . [that] in its highest degree [is] nibbana."41 Thus, when the VaticanLetterdecriesthe placement of "that absolute without image or concepts, which is properto Buddhist theory,on the same level as the majestyof God revealedin Christ,which towersabove finite reality,"it does not reflect with sufficient clarity on the structureof the Buddhist meditative path leading to nirvana. One can consider the Letter'suse of the word "absolute" to referto the nirvanabeyond the four formlessabsorptions;but nirvazna should not be confused with those other states. According to Buddhist teachings, liberationis not derivedfundamentallyfrom apophaticcontemplation. Buddhist theory provides a useful critique of "erroneousways of praying" (rightly or wrongly illustrated in the Letter by the example of the fourth-century charismaticMessalians)that attribute great spiritualvalue to mere psychological experience. Rather than pose a threat, Buddhist theory might inspire fruitful Christianresponsesto the problemsof apophaticimpersonalism. In sum: a Buddhist effectively may nuance the VaticanLetter'sassumption that an absolute without images or concepts is proper to Buddhist theory in light of: (a) the disjunctionbetween nirvanaand the apophaticabodes of nothingness and neither-perception-nor-nonperception,and (b) the distinction between tranquil abiding (samatha)and special insight (vipassana)meditative techniques. The Question of Buddhist Nihilism In the VaticanLetter a charge of nihilism is waged against Buddhism in conjunction with that of impersonalism.The chargeof impersonalismstems from a misconstrualof the structureand limits of apophaticcontemplation in the Buddhist context. The charge of nihilism stems from a confusion between the extinguishedsufferingof nirvanaand radicalannihilation. The topic of nirvanaresistssuperficialanalysis, and one should not conclude hastily, along with the Vatican Letter, that Buddhist soteriology representsa "negative theology." The Letter'sunderstandingof nirvana, which undergirds
BUDDHIST RESPONSE its charge of nihilism, appearsto derive from a perfunctorydefinition that has some value as a general statement, but is too scant to be useful.42 [N]irvana is understood as a state of quiet consisting in the extinction of every tangible reality insofar as it is transient and, as such, delusive and
sorrowful.43
Indeed, nirvanacan be viewed as a state of quiet wherein all that is delusive and sorrowful(that is, pertaining to transient samsara)is somehow extinguished. Yet this understandingdoes not necessarilyimply a nihilistic stance: not every tangible reality is extinguished-just tangible reality insofar as it pertains to samsara,or the condition of suffering. Nirvanadoes not involve a radicalabandonment of the world; and this point can be argued acrossthe Buddhist spectrum. When CardinalRatzingersuggests that Buddhism proffersa "negative thein the early ology," he makes a ratherhonest, but seriousmistake. Particularly fell of scholars into a Western days Buddhological research, many judgment akin to that of the VaticanLetter. In fact, within the Buddhist tradition itself there is evidence of consistent vigilance against nihilistic tendencies-for Buddhist theory considersnihilism to be a majorpitfall of spiritualpractice(along with eternalism). Guy RichardWelbon, in his study of Westernscholarlyinterpretationsof nirvana (especiallyof the nineteenth and earlytwentieth centuries), notes that the question of the nature of nirvanais "one of the oldest in the history of ideas [that] in its variousmodes has been debated furiously by Buddhists and nonBuddhists alike."44 Woven through the historyof Westerninterpretationof nirvana is discussion of its oft-presumed "nihilism." But such presumptions, accordingto Welbon, have been more influenced by cultural bias (and in the early days by lack of accessto Buddhist texts) than by careful interpretationof Buddhist doctrine. He concludes: ever signified merely annihilation or blissClearly,no claim that nirvanra in our [Western]tradition'sacceptanceof such terms-could be substantiated. . . . [W]e may not assume that it is annihilation, except insofaras it is indubitably the destructionof all that properlyfrightens us. . . . [T]he Buddhist nirvanais a religious value only. It is accessibleto the very few, and it is totally misunderstoodwhen seen to be merely that sort of cessation which death supposedlyassuredeveryone.45 After some three hundred pages of intellectual history, Welbon declines to offer any "brief or convenient gloss" of the meaning of nirvana, declaring, "[B]y now it should be obvious that to essay the latter would be to say a great deal more about oneself than about the Buddhist's ultimate concern."46He provides no "apodicticallycertain definition of nirvana . . . due to the nature
160
VICTORIAURUBSHUROW of the idea itself," noting that "[t]here is no way to isolate a simple, primordial meaning of nirvanain the Buddhist usage."47 While Western debate over the meaning of Buddhist nirvana took shape mostly over the last one and one-half centuries, intra-Buddhistdebate on the topic has persisted over the past two and one-half millennia. That history reflectsa fervent critiqueof nirvana,including a significantmeasureof thought over the threat of nihilism. Most notably, around the beginning of the Christian era, a distinctive branchof Indian Buddhism (the Mahayana)emerged, in part as a reaction against the prevailing Abhidharma interpretation of nirv.na.48 Yet, the Abhidharma interpretationof nirvana, which representsthe basis for present-dayTheravada Buddhist thought, exercisedits own critique of nirvanaor nibbdna(Pali). Theravadins traditionally classify nibbana into two aspects: (a) nibbana attainable in the present life, realized in the body (technically,nibbana with the basis still remaining, sopadisesa nibbana dhatu (Pali)), and (b) nibbana occurringafter dissolution of the body, without any remainderof physicalexistence (technically,nibbana without the basis remaining, anupadisesanibbana dhatu (Pali)). The arhat or Theravadaliberated saint, who realizes nibbana in the present body, is one who has destroyedthe defilements, who has lived the life, done what was to be done, laid aside the burden, who has attained his goal, who has destroyed the fetters of existence, who, rightly understanding, is delivered. His five sense-organsstill remain, and as he is not devoid of them he undergoes the pleasant and the unpleasant experiences. That destruction of his attachment, hatred and delusion is called "the element of Nibbana with the basisstill remaining."49 Such an arhat has abandoned not the world but the fetters of attachment, hatred, and delusion. Such a one is happy in the midst of the world; nibbana does not exist somewhereelse for this saint. Moreover,it is realized on the basis of virtue and careful attention exercised through acts of the "fathom-long" human body. The Milindapanhastates: There is no spot looking East, South, West, or North, above, below, or beyond, where Nibbana is situated, and yet Nibbana is; and he who ordershis life aright, grounded in virtue and with rationalattention, may realize it whetherhe lives in Greece, China, Alexandria,or in Kosala. Just as fire is not stored up in any particularplace but ariseswhen the necessaryconditions exist, so Nibbana is said not to exist in a particular conditions arefulfilled.50 place, but is attained when the necessary The Venerable Mathera Narada (d. 1983) articulates a contemporary Theravada stance on the question of nibbana and nihilism. He rejects the chargeof nihilism.
BUDDHIST RESPONSE To say that Nibbana is nothingness simply because one cannot perceive it with the five senses, is as illogical as to conclude that light does not exist simply becausethe blind do not see it.51 Narada illustrates the positive characterof nibbana with a popular Buddhist parableof the fish and the turtle: Becausethe fish had lived all its life in water and knew nothing of land, all its queries about land met with negative responsesfrom the turtle, who inhabited both land and water. "No, it is not wet. No, it is not soft and yielding," and so on. The fish mistakenlyconcluded that land is nothingness, as one who never experienced nibbana might mistakenlyconclude that nibbana is nothingness. Narada explains that if nibbana is nothingness, then it must coincide with space, as both in Buddhist theory are consideredto be eternal and unchanging. Yet, space is eternal because it is nothing in itself. Nibbana, by contrast, is spacelessand timeless. Space is not; nibbana is. Moreover,nibbana is realized as a mental object (vatthudhammu), which "decidedly proves that it is not a state of nothingness." He argues that if nibbana were a mere state of nothingness, the Buddha would not have used terms such as "infinite" (ananta), "security" (khema), "happiness" (siva), "absolute purity" (visuddho), "emancipation" (mutti), and "peace" (santi)with referenceto it.52 The Nibbana of the Buddhists is, therefore, neither a state of nothingness nor a mere cessation. What it is not, one can definitely say.What precisely it is, one cannot adequately expressin conventional terms as it is unique. It is for self-realization.53 In spite of a common rejection of nihilism, Theravadaand MahayanaBuddhists maintain persistent differences with respect to their conception of the final goal of spiritualpractice.Thomas P. Kasulisnotes: The Mahayanistswere generally more interested in the truth to which enlightenment was an awakening than the pain from which it was a release. This emphasison the positive aspect of enlightenment also caused to be diminished the importanceof nirvanaas the releasefrom rebirth.54 Consistent with their special interest in samsara,MahayanaBuddhists tend to pursue the ideal of becoming a bodhisattva ratherthan an arhat, which is the most commonly expressed aspiration of Theravadapractitioners. The bodhisattva aspirantstresses the religious value of continuing to reincarnatein the midst of samsarafor the sake of helping all sentient beings achieve freedom from suffering. Both Abhidharmaand Mahayana Buddhism aim for the enlightenment of in but whereas the view enlightenment is achieved Abhidharma everyone, by one person at a time and the group as a whole pushes upwardin a pyra-
162
VICTORIAURUBSHUROW mid effect, supporting most the spiritual progressof those at the top, in MahayanaBuddhism the bodhisattvas at the top turn back to pull up those behind them until everyoneis readyto achieve enlightement simul5 taneously. Buddhism "place[d] new emphasison the social emotions," as the Mahayana four Brahmaviharas known to early Indian Buddhism (and later Theravada) were amplified: Friendlinessand compassionbecame "cardinalvirtuesof prime importance."Sympatheticjoy was "enrichedwith a new altruisticcomponent, which is technicallyknown as the 'dedication of merit'." And impartialitywas "clearly and unmistakably defined as including friendliness and compassion . . . and ensure[d] that the Buddha is equally compassionateto all."56Santideva's (eighth century C.E.) descriptionof the altruisticaspirationsof a bodhisattvaillustratesthis social orientation: Thus, by the virtuecollected Through all that I have done, Maythe pain of everyliving creature Be completely clearedaway. MayI be the doctorand the medicine And may I be the nurse Forall sick beings in the world Until everyoneis healed. Maya rainof food and drinkdescend To clearawaythe pain of thirstand hunger And during the aeon of famine MayI myself change into food and drink. MayI become an inexhaustibletreasure Forthose who aredestitute. MayI turn into all things they could need And may these be placed close beside them. Without any sense of loss I shall give up my body and enjoyments As well as all my virtuesof the three times Forthe sake of benefitting all.57 In sum, the VaticanLetter'schargethat Buddhism promotes a radicalannihilation that unequivocallynegates the world reasonablycan be disputed on the basis of: (a) a deeper appreciationof the meaning and historyof the term nirv?za58 and (b) considerationof the scope of Buddhist ethics, which involves(for all Buddhists) acts of virtue in the world as the basis for spiritualdevelopment, and (for the Mahayanists) a commitment to reincarnatingin the world for the
BUDDHIST RESPONSE sake of suffering beings. However, the Letter'sfull expression of this charge againstBuddhism cannot be answeredon the basis of Buddhist theory alone, as the text involves the use of "God" language. To treat adequately the Letter's claim that Buddhism "transcendsevery affirmation seeking to express what God is, and thus denies that the things of this world can offer traces of the infinity of God"59calls for the methods of interreligiousdialogue. The Question ofReligious Language The pervasiveuse of Christiantheological language in the Vatican Letter renders the text somewhat inert in a dialogicalcontext. Forexample, the veryterm "negative theology" is inappropriatewith respect to Buddhism, as the tradition never treats theos as such. Other instances of tradition-bound language that surfacein the Letterpresent problems for both Christiansand Buddhists attempting to make adequate comparativeassessments. While a full-fledged discussionof methodological problems relativeto religious language is beyond the scope of this essay,a few observationson the Asian traditionsare offered to help mitigate obstacles to dialogue engendered through the Vatican Letter's particularconceptualorientation. The VaticanLettersuggeststwo questions that deal with Christianappropriation of Buddhist elements: (1) By what logic might some Christiansplace nirvana on the same level as the majesty of God revealed in Christ, which towers above finite reality?and (2) By what logic might some Christianspropose abandoning: (a) meditation on the salvific works accomplished in history by the God of the old and new covenant, and (b) the very idea of the one and triune God, who is love, in favor of an immersion "in the indeterminate abyss of the divinity,"which is a darknessin which the light of the Trinitynever shines? In the first question, the problem of religious language surfacesin the analogy between the majesty of God revealed in Christ and the transcendenceof nirvana.CardinalRatzingerjudges the comparisonto be inapt, and a Buddhist might agree. Yet, to affirm this judgment, one must, at the very least, (a) determine specifically which Buddhist "nirva.na" (Theravada, Tibetan Buddhist, Pure Land, Zen, and so forth) is being used as the basis for Christian interpretation, and (b) distinguish between the transcendentalmajestyof God and Christincarnate.The problem of comparingnirvanato God or Christmust be subject to the Letter'sown call for a "thoroughgoing examination so as to avoid the dangerof falling into syncretism."60 The second question concerns the conversionof Christiansto an alien perspective that does not involve the Abrahamicconception of God and revealed scripture.It also repudiates the adoption of an erroneousway of praying (presumably Buddhist) that leads to an undifferentiated darknessin which there is no presence (or cognizance) of God the Father, Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit. As the VaticanLettersuggests, Buddhism does not addressitself to meditation on the God of the old and new covenant, and the triune God. This is
164
VICTORIAURUBSHUROW quite natural: Buddha Sakyamunilived about six centuries before Christ in a part of the world (north India) that was not cross-fertilizedby Hebrew culture. But, in considerationof the VaticanLetter'simplied repudiation of Buddhism for these omissions, one must ask: Does this lack of trinitarytheological doctrine necessarilyproduce a "darknessin which the light of the Trinity never
shines?"61
Cardinal Ratzinger (adopting a conception of errorfrom Meister Eckhart) considersnirvanato be a darknessthat mercilesslyengulfs Buddhists into "the indeterminate abyss of the divinity."What is more, Christiancontemplatives who adopt Buddhist methods presumablyare subject to similarspiritualdevastation. However,one should not jump to the conclusion that the Buddhist lack of a triune concept of God (or more modestly the lack of monotheistic doctrine) promotes the existential and soteriologicalhazard of such a dark abyss. One responsiblycan contest the Vatican Letter'sjudgment that Buddhist spiritual practiceleads to immersion into some indeterminate anything-or nothingin light of the foregoing discussion on impersonalismand nihilism: (1) Buddhist theorydoes not place ultimate spiritualvalue on formlessapophaticexperiences derived from tranquil abiding (samatha)contemplation; (2) Buddhism emphasizes both virtue (s-la) and special insight into the profoundly interdependent processesof this world; (3) nirvanais not nothingness, and in the context of the bodhisattva careerit is experienced repeatedly in the midst of the sufferings of cyclic existence; and (4) historically,the Buddhist tradition has been its own most severe critic of nihilistic tendencies, rejecting nihilism and eternalismas two gravepitfalls to spiritualdevelopment. Although Buddha Sakyamunidid not speak of the Trinity,it would be difficult to state categoricallythat the light of whatevermysterya Christiancalls the "Trinity"never shines on a Buddhist. The VaticanLetteroffers three basic criteria for judging the spiritualvalue of Christianprayer.If these are applied to an authenticallypracticingBuddhist, there is indication that the Buddhist, too, is not devoid of light. The Letterstates: ContemplativeChristianprayeralwaysleads to love of neighbor, to action and to the acceptanceof trials, and preciselybecause of this it drawsone more closely to God.62 In spite of differencesin religiouslanguage (and all that implies relativeto doctrine and practice), one finds evidence that Buddhist spiritualityalso leads to love of neighbor, action, and acceptanceof trials. It is difficult to see how one could deny that Buddhists (or other non-Christians)who meet these criteria come closerto "God" through contemplation. Again, it is a matter for interreligious dialogue to make sense out of the Christianconception of "God" relative to non-Abrahamicreligious traditions. Moreover,one would not automatically accept a conflation of the mysteryof Christ incarnatewith the Mahayana bodhisattva, or the Hindu avatara,for example. Yet, one cannot presume that
BUDDHIST RESPONSE because elements of various religious doctrines differ, similar fruits cannot be achieved by a different logic. Each religious tradition has its own logic and integrity, and where love, for example, may be promoted one way in tradition West, it may be promoted through different means in traditionEast. The VaticanLettersuggests that the "profoundlyChristianaffirmation"that "God is love" is "fulfilled in the reality of Christianitybeyond all measure" becausethe personalself and other creaturesneither dissolve nor disappearinto the sea of the Absolute.63 Yet, granted that Christian love has a distinctive cultural, doctrinal, and sacramenquality and depth that derivefrom particular tal contexts, it would be difficult to claim that God's love can only (or best) be discoveredby a Christian.It is not unreasonableto insist that though it may be a profoundlyChristianaffirmation, the Lovethat is God is greaterthan any one religioustradition. A look at the religions of India (which underlie the VaticanLetter'sconcept of "Easternreligions") suggests that great love is garnered through them as well. Bearingin mind that the Indian traditionsare not monolithic and should not be overgeneralized,one can claim that they commonly aspireto liberation (moksa/nirvana) from the suffering of the cycle of worldly existence (sazmsara).64 In spite of the fact that liberation in some contexts involveswhat might be characterizedas an impersonal goal, one must neverthelessask: Does that ideal of liberation necessarily result in a devaluation of the world and an absence of the love that is a profoundly Christianaffirmation?Before judging that aJain, Buddhist, or Hindu contemplative is plunged into "the indeterminate abyssof the divinity,"which is a darknessin which the light of the Trinity never shines, one must deeply consider:How is it that the Indian religious traditions (arguably)have made the most extensiveand profound contributionsto the theory and practice of ahimsa or nonviolence in the religious history of humankind? If these traditionsreally "[deny] that the things of this world can offer tracesof the infinity of God"65(by whatevername) in this world in favor of dissolution into a sea of the Absolute, how have they become so sensitive to the preciousnessof life? How is it that the Jains traditionallymaintain free hospitals that admit even homeless ailing animals? How is it that religious Buddhists vow not to take the life of any sentient being-ideally, not even that of a mosquito or an ant? How is it that Hinduism produced a MahatmaGandhi, who gave his life to an experiment in nonviolence? Gandhi the Hindu discovered, too, that God is love: I would say with those who say 'God is Love,' God is Love. But deep down in me I used to say that though God may be Love, God is Truth above all. If it is possible for the human tongue to give the fullest description of God, I have come to the conclusion that God is Truth. Two years ago I went a step further and said that Truth is God. You will see the fine distinction between the two statements, "God is Truth" and "Truthis God." I came to that conclusion after a continuous and relentless search after
166
VICTORIAURUBSHUROW truth which began fifty yearsago. I then found that the nearest approach to truth was through love. . . . For these and many other reasons, I have come to the conclusion that the definition-Truth is God-gives me the greatest satisfaction. And when you want to find Truth as God, the only inevitable means is love, that is nonviolence, and since I believe that ultimately the means and ends are convertibleterms, I should not hesitate to say that God is Love.66 In spite of aggravatingproblems of religious language, might not Gandhi's inversionof "God is Truth" to "Truthis God" be extended to the Biblical dictum "God is love" (1 John 4:8)? As a point of departurefor bringing Christians and Buddhists nearer to interreligiousdiscoverymight we not propose that "Love is God." If we can accept the fundamental premise that LOVEis foundational, then a Buddhist may also have accessto God.
IV. CONCLUSION
There is no doubt about it: important differences, even blatant contradictions, exist between Christianityand Buddhism. Often the discrepanciesstem not merely from problems of religious language, but from deep structuralvariations. In the context of such obstaclesto dialogue ThomasMertonpointed out: [T]here must be scrupulousrespect for important differences, and where one no longer understands or agrees, this must be kept clear-without uselessdebate. There aredifferencesthat arenot debatable, and it is a useless, silly temptation to try to argue them out. Let them be left intact until a moment of greaterunderstanding.67 Thus, without useless debate, vexing issues that emerge in a Buddhist reading of the VaticanLettermight be left intact until a moment of greaterunderstanding: Where in the Buddhist tradition might God be found? Where in the Christian tradition might nirvana be found? Does the light of a triune God Is the wisdom of a Buddha availableto shine anywhereoutside of Christianity? a non-Buddhist? Much interreligiouswork is left to do, and courageousefforts are called for. The VaticanLetter reflects a courageouseffort, and one can feel optimistic in calling for furtherVaticanconsiderationof the structureand dynamicsof meditation. Through such efforts Christiansand non-Christianscan benefit; and those who take an interest in the interreligious work can benefit most from their own and others' experienceif they exerciserespect grounded in the profound love of which they arecapable. One might considerhere the wordsof the Indian King Asoka: The faiths of others all deserveto be honored for one reasonor another.By honoring them, one exalts one's own faith and at the same time performs
BUDDHIST RESPONSE a serviceto the faith of others. By acting otherwise, one injuresone's own faith and also does disserviceto that of others. For if a man extols his own faith and disparagesanother because of devotion to his own and because he wants to glorify it, he seriouslyinjureshis own faith. Therefore concord alone is commendable, for through concord men may learn and respect the conception of Dharma [religious teaching] accepted by others. King Priyadarsi[Asoka] desires men of all faiths to know each other's doctrinesand to acquiresound doctrines.68 These ancient wordsof King Asoka encouragethe practiceof interreligiousdialogue with an attitude of openness and intelligence. They also allow us to appreciate the efforts of CardinalRatzinger: by advancing guidelines to promote authentic Christian contemplation, the Vatican Letter does a service to Catholicism. Further,by sanctioning dialogue with Buddhism and other Eastern traditions, the Letternot only contributesto greaterunderstandingamong personsof different faiths, but also to the enrichmentof those faiths.
167
NOTES 1. CardinalJoseph Ratzinger,prefect of the Vatican'sCongregationfor the Doctrine of the Faith, "Letterto the Bishopsof the CatholicChurchon Some Aspectsof Christian Meditation."Hereafter,this document will be cited as "Letter." 2. Catherine Odell, "Vatican'sMeditation Document Draws Support: The Church's Cautions about Meditation Techniques Distorted by Media, Contemplatives Say,"Our Sunday Visitor,1 April 1990, p. 4. 3. David S. Toolan, "Drinking from Eastern Sources," America, 3 February1990, p. 76. 4. Ama Samy, "Maya ChristianPracticeZen or Yoga?"Inculturation(Spring 1990): 29. 5. James RobertsonPrice, "VaticanConcernedabout EasternMeditation," Common Boundary,March/April1990, p. 10. 6. Ratzinger,Letter,par. 16. 7. John Wijngaards, "Learning from the East," The Tablet, 16 December 1989, p. 1461. 8. Toolan, "Drinkingfrom EasternSources,"p. 76. 9. Ibid., pp. 76-77. 10. Price, "VaticanConcerned,"p. 11. 11. Fr.Paul Philibert, O.P., "An Open Letterto AmericanReligiousConcerningCardinal Ratzinger'sInstructionon Aspects of ChristianMeditation,"Bulletin of the North AmericanBoardfor East-West Dialogue, May 1990, p. 7. 12. Ratzinger,Letter,par. 12. 13. Yse Masquelier, "Reponse au cardinal Ratzinger,"Le Monde, 26 January 1990, sec. "Religions orientales." An example of overgeneralization(not specificallycited by Masquelier)is the following: "[The reflections of some Easternand Western Christian spiritualwriters]while presenting points in common with Easternnon-Christianmethods of meditation, avoid the exaggerationsand partialityof the latter .. ." (Ratzinger, Letter,par. 26). Nowhere does CardinalRatzingerexplain what might constitute "exaggeration" and "partiality."
168
VICTORIAURUBSHUROW
14. Fr.Bede Griffiths, O. Cam. O.S.B., "Monk'sResponseto Document of Christian from the CongregationDoctrine of Faith,"Bulletin of the North AmericanBoard Prayer forEast-WestDialogue, May 1990, p. 11. 15. Samy,"Maya Christian,"p. 31. 16. Ibid. 17. Ibid. 18. Griffiths, "Monk'sResponse,"p. 11. 19. Ibid. from the East,"p. 1462. 20. Wijngaards,"Learning 21. Ratzinger,Letter,pars. 1 and 2. 22. Thomas Merton, The Asian Journal of Thomas Merton (New York:New Directions, 1975), p. 316. 23. RaimundoPanikkar,The Intrareligious Dialogue (New York:PaulistPress, 1978), p. 10. 24. Ratzinger,Letter,par. 15. 25. This insight has been articulated by Sam D. Gill in his Native American Religions: An Introduction(Belmont, California:WadsworthPublishing Co., 1982). 26. Suttanipata, cited by Walpola Rahula, What the Buddha Taught (New York: GrovePress, 1974), p. 10. 27. Ratzinger,Letter,par. 10. 28. Ibid., par. 12. 29. This is the only place in the body of the VaticanLetterthat an Asian, non-Christian religion is mentioned by name. Aside from specific naming of Asian traditionsin the introductoryabstractand in an occasionalnote, the general terms "Eastern"and "non-Christian"are used. "Easternmethods" are defined in note 1 as "methods which are inspired by Hinduism and Buddhism, such as Zen, transcendentalmeditation or yoga. Thus it indicatesmethods of meditation of the non-ChristianFarEastwhich today are not infrequentlyadopted by some Christiansalso in their meditation." The note further states that the document is also intended to "serveas a referencepoint not just for this problem but also, in a more general way,for the different forms of prayerpracticed nowadays in ecclesial organizations, particularly in associations, movements and groups." 30. Ratzinger,Letter,par. 12, notes 14 and 15. 31. Ibid., note 14. 32. Technicaltermsused with referenceto Asian topics are renderedin Sanskritunless otherwiseindicated. 33. The supramundaneabsorptionsknown as dhyanaorjhana (Pali) transcendformal experience involving the five senses and are typically named as four. They appear in order of increasingsubtlety to the meditator who abides successivelyin the realms of infinite space, infinite consciousness,nothingness, and neither-perception-nor-nonperception. Although these formlessabodes are counted as the highest fruits of samathaor concentrativemeditation, they do not result in liberation from the suffering of cyclic existence. 34. Amadeo Sole-Leris,a contemporaryinterpreterof traditionalTheravadameditation, describes the samatha branch of bhdvandas "abstractivemeditation because it worksthrough the progressivediscardingof sensoryand mental stimuli-[which is] very comparableto the meditative techniques used in other traditions."He defines samatha as follows: Samathameditation, or tranquillitymeditation, aims to achieve states of consciousnesscharacterizedby increasinglyhigher levels of mental tranquillity and stillness. It comprisestwo elements-the achievementof the
BUDDHIST RESPONSE
highest possible degree of mental concentrationand, along with it, the progressivecalming of all mental processes.This is achieved through an increasinglyconcentratedfocusing of attention, in which the mind withdrawsmore and more from all physicaland mental stimuli. This is from Amadeo Sole-Leris,Tranquillity and Insight: An Introductionto the Oldest Formof Buddhist Meditation (Boston: Shambhala, 1986), pp. 22, 21. 35. The lack of inherent existence of the self (anatman), realized through the vipasyandbranchof bhavana, is not to be confused with a radicallyimpersonallack of self. It does not deny the conventional existence of person, but insists on the dependently arising characterof the person in light of Buddha Sakyamuni'srealization of the interdeIn MahayanaBuddhism the concept pendence of all phenomena (pratityasamutpada). of no self (anatman) is supplanted mainly by that of emptiness (sunyatd), which indicates the lack of inherent existence both of personsand phenomena. Sunyatd, like andtman, bearsintimately on the realizationof dependent arising. 36. The Eightfold Path is typicallyoutlined in Pali, as follows: (1) Right Understanding (samma ditthi). Understanding the Four Noble Truths: Truthof Suffering, Truthof the Cause of Suffering, Truthof the Cessationof Suffering, and Truthof the Path Leadingto the Cessationof Suffering. (2) Right Thought (sammasatkappa). Thinking thoughts of love and nonviolence to all beings. Lackof selfish thoughts such as ill-will, hatred, and jealousy. (3) Right Speech (samma vacd). Telling no lies, slander, gossip, using no abusive speech. (4) Right Action (samma kammanta). Promoting honorable, peaceful conduct. No destructionof life. No dishonest dealings. No sexualmisconduct. (5) Right Livelihood (sammdajiva). Selling no weapons, poisons, etc. No work that involveskilling. No cheating. (6) Right Effort (sammdvaydma). Preventing unwholesome mental states from arising. Eliminating unwholesome mental states that already exist. Producing wholesome mental states. Developing existing wholesome mental states. (7) Right Mindfulness (samma sati). Being diligently aware/carefulof: activities of the body, activitiesof the mind, sensationsor feelings, ideas, thoughts, concepts. (8) Right Concentration (sammd samddhi). Disciplining of the mind that leads to eight statesof dhyana,jhdna (the subtle formal and aformalabsorptionsdiscussedabove culminating in the state of neither-perception-nor-nonperception). This outline is derivedfrom ChapterV in Walpola Rahula, What the Buddha Taught, pp. 45-50. The Six Perfectionsare typicallyoutlined as follows: (1) Giving (ddna). This has three aspects:giving of things (necessities)without hope of return or reward; giving of protection, rescuing living beings from harm; giving Dharma, teaching Dharma accordingto the ability of the disciple, not looking for gain or respect. (2) MoralPractice(sila). This has three aspects:moral practiceof vows; moral practice of gatheringvirtuous actions; and moral practiceof workingfor the benefit of other living beings. (3) Patience (ksdnti).This has three aspects:patience of not reactingnegatively when harmed; patience of purposely taking the misery of others on oneself; and the patience of having confidence in the Dharma. (4) Effort (virya).This has three aspects:effort of working with pleasure and without regretin orderto achieve the qualities of the Buddha, and staying in the world as long as
170
VICTORIA URUBSHUROW
necessaryto help a single living being; effort of gathering virtue, accomplishingthe six perfections, etc; and effort of workingfor the benefit of living beings. (5) Meditation (dhyana).This can be seen from three standpoints:standpoint of location, namely, meditation within or beyond samsara;standpoint of direction, namely abiding tranquillity,intense insight, and the unification of these two; and standpoint of activity, namely meditation of happiness of mind and body, or creating the basis of excellence, and of workingfor the benefit of all living beings. (6) Wisdom (prajin). This has three aspects:wisdom that realizes the ultimate truth of emptiness (paramarthasatya); wisdom that realizes the relative truth (sarmvrtisatya); and wisdom that understandsperfectlythe way to achievethe purposesof living beings. These definitions are reproducedalmost verbatim from the glossaryof Geshe Wangyal, trans., The Door of Liberation:EssentialTeachingsof the TibetanBuddhist Tradition (New York:Lotsawa,1978), pp. 214, 218, 220, 210, 217-18, 228. 37. Sole-Leris,Tranquillity andInsight, p. 22. The present discussionof insight meditation is based on the classicalTheravadainterpretationof Buddha Sakyamuni'steaching of the four foundations of mindfulness (contained in the SatipatthanaSutra): (a) observationof body activities, such as breathing and postures; (b) observationof pleasant, unpleasant, or neutralsensationsarisingwithin the body; (c) observationof the various states of mind that arise and dissolve; and (d) observation of particularmental objects, such as the FourNoble Truths,and other Buddhist teachings. The Sanskritterm vipasyanais renderedhere in its Pali form, vipassana,as this latter term has gained particular status in both classical Theravada and contemporarydiscussions of Buddhist meditation. Although MahayanaBuddhism generally preservesthe crucial distinction between concentrationand insight, its methods of applying the foundations of mindfulness vary, and often are not identified specifically in terms of vipasyand. Due to the diversityof meditative practicesthat evolved in MahayanaBuddhism in concertwith its culturaldiversity,the present discussionis based on a conservative(Theravada)interpretation of foundational teachings, for the sake of clarity. 38. Ibid., p. 24. 39. Ibid., p. 23. 40. Ibid., p. 25. 41. Ibid., p. 26. 42. The complex nature and historyof the term nirvanabecame evident to Thomas P. Kasulis, who, in his surveyof major Buddhist schools, was impelled to explain why, in many cases, the term even ceased to be relevant. Of course, Buddhism comprehendsa diverseset of religiousphenomena, a tradition with sacred texts in four principal canonical languages (Pali, Sanskrit,Tibetan, and Chinese), and a spiritualfollowing throughout the world. Not surprisingly,then, when referring to the ultimate spiritual ideal many Buddhist groups prefer to emphasize their own distinctive termsinstead of nirvazna. This is from Thomas P. Kasulis, "Nirvana,"in Buddhism andAsian History: Religion, History,and Culture:Selectionsfrom The EncyclopediaofReligion, ed. Joseph M. Kitagawa and MarkD. Cummings (New York:MacmillanPublishing Co., 1989), p. 395. 43. Ratzinger,Letter,note 14. 44. Guy RichardWelbon, The Buddhist Nirvana and Its WesternInterpreters(Chicago: Universityof ChicagoPress, 1968), p. viii. 45. Ibid., p. 299, 304. 46. Ibid., p. 298.
BUDDHIST RESPONSE
47. Ibid., pp. x, 299. 48. The division of Buddhism into two major branches was based on a schism to the Theravadaand Mahayana, between the Sthavirasand Mahasanghikas (precursers respectively)that dates from what is traditionallyknown as the Second Buddhist Council, held at Vai'ali, about 383 B.C.E. Indian MahayanaBuddhists minimized the opposition between nirva.na and samsdra,renouncing the suggestion that nirvanawas an escape from the world of suffering [samsdra].Instead, they thought of enlightenment as a wise and compassionateway of living in that world. (Kasulis, "Nirvana,"p. 397) 49. MahatheraNarada, The Buddha and His Teachings,2d ed. (Sri Lanka:Buddhist PublicationSociety, 1974), p. 291. 50. Milindapanha, cited by Narada, The Buddha and His Teachings,pp. 297. The Milindapanha is an authoritative, but non-canonical, Pali work probably dating from the beginning of the common era. 51. Narada, The Buddha andHis Teachings,p. 288. 52. Ibid., p. 290. 53. Ibid., p. 291. 54. Kasulis, "Nirvana,"p. 399. 55. Ibid. 56. EdwardConze, Buddhist Thought in India: ThreePhasesof Buddhist Philosophy (George Allen & Unwin, 1962; reprint, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1973), pp. 217-218. 57. Shantideva, A Guide to the Bodhisattva's Wayof Life, trans. and ed. Stephen Batchelor(Dharamsala:Library of Tibetan Worksand Archives, 1979), pp. 30-31. 58. Recall that Guy Richard.Welbonoffers no apodicticallycertain definition of nirvana, and MahatheraNarada leaves its precisedefinition for self-realization.Thomas P. Kasulis, in an effort to summarizeBuddhist conceptions of nirvana,lists and explains a set of six sharedqualities; and EdwardConze strivesfor precisionby integrating numerous epithets from Buddhist scriptureinto his explanation of the term. Conze contrasts nirvanawith the three marks of all conditioned things, calling it deathless, peaceful, and secure. With respect to these qualities he lists over thirty epithets from Buddhist scripturesthat expressthe same ideas, and classifiesthe remainingattributesor names of nirvanaunder three other headings that include over forty more epithets. Furthermore, Conze opens a whole new explanation of nirvanawith his discussionof doctrines common to the Mahayana.Cf. Welbon, The Buddhist Nirvana, pp. x, 299; Narada, The Buddha and His Teachings, p. 291; Kasulis, "Nirvana," p. 404; Conze, Buddhist Thought in India, pp. 69-79, 226-230. 59. Ratzinger,Letter,par. 12. 60. Ibid. 61. MeisterEckhart,Sermo "Ave GratiaPlena," cited by Ratzinger,Letter,note 15. 62. Ratzinger,Letter,par. 13. 63. Ibid., par. 15. 64. The VaticanLetternevermentionsJainism; but it must be counted as a significant member of the Indian family along with Hinduism and Buddhism. One can generalize about these three Indian traditions only provisionally,in the awarenessthat the techniques of liberation, the concept of the structureof the world, and so on vary (sometimes considerably)within and among them. Although Buddhism is the one tradition directly charged with fostering a "negative theology," the Letter suggests a broader charge against Easternreligions in general, because they aspire to liberation from the
172
VICTORIAURUBSHUROW worldof cyclic existence. Thepointhereis thatmoksaor liberation doesnot necessarily in the radical in the Vatican of theworld sensesuggested Letter. implydevaluation 65. Ratzinger, Letter, par.16. 66. Mahatma Reflections Gandhi,All Men are Brothers: (New Autobiographical York: Continuum, 1980),p. 64. Asian 67. Merton, Journal, p. 316. 68. Asoka,TheEdictsof Asoka,ed. and trans.N. A. Nikamand Richard McKeon of Chicago Press,1959;PhoenixBooks,1966),pp. 51-52. (The (Chicago: University is fromRock Edict XII.) quotation

Love Is God

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Love Is God

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Love Is God: A Buddhist Interreligious Response to the Vatican Instruction on "Some Aspects of Christian Meditation" Author(s): Victoria Urubshurow

Catholic University of America

Você também pode gostar